EFL Statement: Bristol Rovers

Just to add to "the virus isn't that deadly" debate.
Germany who were trumpeted during the first wave as being brilliant at controlling the virus yesterday had 33k of cases and over 800 deaths so if it ain't deadly then Public Health over there has gone rapidly tits up.

Today’s radio show on LBC James OBrein spent the first 2 hrs tackling exactly the nonsense that pirate ( Wes) posts on here .
It was completely and utterly shown up to be the absolute dangerous nonsense it is .
Go have a listen pirate ...

I acknowledged the figure is going to be higher, but you conveniently skip over the fact Sweden chose a model that can over-report deaths and the long term affects to this country and people are likely to be much worse from the disproportionate lockdown approach we've taken. As Professor John Ioannidis said: "lockdown is a nuclear weapon that destroys everything".

It isn't throwing sand or distracting to point out the fact an official report stated Sweden failed in its effort to protect the elderly in care homes - for which the government has admitted responsibility, or point out over 90% of Covid-related deaths have been among those aged 70 and over, and nearly half of all Covid deaths have been in care homes. It is totally relevant.

Yes I've said isolate people with symptoms and protect the vulnerable and at risk groups, but being protected should be an individual's choice and not for clowns like our government to decide who you can and can't see.

Plainly, yes. There is a mutation chance every time it replicates and the natural selection will gear itself towards anything that gives it a greater chance of spread. Severity is different, if it mutates something that kills quick enough, spread will be reduced and natural selection will phase that mutation out. Worst case scenario for us (and natural evolution for the virus) is that it mutates to spread better in our socially distanced world (lives on surfaces longer, airborne, asymptomatic contagion etc) and kills more often, just not quickly. The virus doesn't care if the host dies or not, providing its spread rate is exponential before death occurs. And spread is generally worse the more you are affected sadly. Mind you the virus doesn't care about anything, its just evolution.

You said it might be higher, then continued to try and prove how actually you're still correct - even though you're not. Anyway, never mind. The Swedish Covid counting point isn't a home run win for you, as you seem to think it is. Unless you can show me the figures of the differences, it means nothing. A point on someone dying after being hit by a bus whilst having Covid doesn't prove any point, if anything it shows how unrealistic it is. 

Yes you're right, those facts are relevant, but not to the point that you'r trying to make. We're discussing total deaths of Sweden and you're suggesting deaths this year are no different to previous years. Which is incorrect. Can you admit that? In fact March-March it will be roughly 34% higher than previous 10 years, can you admit that?

The problem is with your last point/theory is:

1. Isolate those with symptoms (well as you've astutely pointed out, they all keep getting hit by buses and clearly are ignoring the rules) (ok that was a joke, but how do we do that? We're trying to do it now, but it isn't working very well - is it?)
2. If you 'protect' the vulnerable but give them the choice, then surely it's just going to spread to the vulnerable anyway and they'll all die. Great plan.

Unfortunately, whilst your idea may be good (just reading your post to Stuart), it's complete fantasy. Unfortunately we can see that the British people cannot be trusted to follow the rules. We no longer have the culture of doing whats best for our nation, only what is best for how I feel at the moment. Add to that an incapable government, and here we are.